Los Angeles daily herald., 1887-08-18

| falsehoods told by said Lucas con-
cerning the attorneys for the plaintiff
and which are referred to in plaintiffs
affidavit this day filed herein. When
he ascertained what statements said
Lucas had made to the plaintiff he
was able at once to demonstrate and
prove beyond question that there was
no foundation therefor. The facts
concerning the assignment of the
| Judgment referred to in said affidavit
of said Unruh, are that said judgment
was assigned to plaintiffs attor-
neys, and that the assignment
itself specified that it was so as
signed as security merely for moneys
due and to become due plaintiffs at
torneys under a specific contract al
ready entered into, and said assign
ment was in all respects voluntary
and was made upon the data shown
by the records herein. The assertion
to the effect that the plaintiff is under
coercion is absolutely false. The plain
tiff is person of positive and deter
mined character and it is not pos
sible for either her mother or
her attorneys to coerce her. She has
returned to Los Angeles voluntarily to
prosecute this action. 1t is not true
that the plaintiff refused to come to
this city until Saturday or Sunday,
August 18th or 14th. The statement
that she was met at the depot by her
attorneys, or either or any of them, is
false, and the statement that she was
under surveillance of her mother, or
anyone else, is false. The statement
that she was prevented, or has been
prevented. from seeing or having con-
versation with any other person than
her attorneys or her household since
her return is also false. 1t is true that
she has declined to allow persons to
interview her concerning said case.
She has done this at the request of her
attorneys, and her attorneys have SO
advised her, because upon other oc-
casions when she permitted herself to
be interviewed the defendant and his
attorneys have stated in court that she
was obtaining such interviews for the
purpose OF biasing the public and of
creating opinion in her favor. And
the plaintiff herself has stated to affi-
ant, in the most positive terms, that
she did not wish to be interviewed by
persons, except those connected with
the case.
Affiant is informed and believes,
and he therefore 80 alleges that spies
have been sent to the house of the
mother of plaintiff for the purpose of
ascertaining such matters as they might
be able to discover and of working
- har 10 nd <>f v,rvtrn into
her affairs, and for that reason the
plaintiff has been more than ordinarily
careful about her associations. After
her experience with said Lucas and
Baldwin's other agents her attorneys
have thought it advisable to warn her
to avoid talking unnecessarily and
alone with any person with whom she
was not particularly well acquainted
and concerning whose surroundings
she was not fully and thoroughly in
formed.
Affiant is informed and believes that
at the time said alleged settlement was
signed, said II. A. Unruh and said A.
j. Lucas were present, and both
signed the same as witnesses, and the
only settlement which has ever been
made herein as affiant is informed
and believes, is that which has been
80 procured through said Lucas.
Signed: STEPHEN nj. WHITE.
Louise G. Perkins, being duly
sworn, says that she has heard read
the foregoing affidavit of Stephen M.
White, and that all the facts therein
set forth are true. She is not labor
ing under duress or coercion of any
one whatever. She came to this city
voluntarily for the purpose of trying
said case and being present thereat; ;
and she has never been in any man.
ner threatened or intimidated by her
mother, her counsel or any other per-
son, except in so far as she had been
deceived by the fraudulent actions OF
A. j. Lucas and defendants agents.
[Signedl LOUISE G. PERKINS.
This finishes the proceedings for the
present time, and on the 9TH of No
vember it is extremely probable that
the trial will go on until a finish.